The recent findings of cocaine,
nicotine, and hashishin Egyptian mummies by Balabanova et. al. have beencriticized on grounds that: contamination
of the mummies may have occurred, improper techniques may have been used,
chemical decomposition may have produced the compounds in question, recent
mummies of drug users were mistakenly evaluated, that no similar cases are
known of such compounds in long-dead bodies, and especially that
pre-Columbian transoceanic voyages are highly speculative.These criticisms are each discussed in
turn.Balabanova et. al. are shown to
have used and confirmed their findings with accepted methods.The possibility of the compounds being
byproducts of decomposition is shown to be without precedent and highly
unlikely.The possibility that the
researchers made evaluations from of faked mummies of recent drug users is
shown to be highly unlikely in almost all cases.Several additional cases of identified American drugs in
mummies are discussed.Additionally,
it is shown that significant evidence exists for contact with the Americas in
pre-Columbian times.It is determined
that the original findings are supported by substantial evidence despite the
initial criticisms.

In a one-page article appearing in Naturwissenschaften, German scientist
Svetla Balabanova (1992) and two of her colleagues reported findings of
cocaine, hashish and nicotine in Egyptian mummies.The findings were immediately identified as improbable on the
grounds that two of the substances are known to be derived only from American
plants - cocaine from Erythroxylon
coca, and nicotine from Nicotiana
tabacum.The suggestion that such
compounds could have found their way to Egypt before Columbus' discovery of
America seemed patently impossible.

The study was done as part of an
ongoing program of investigating the use of hallucinogenic substances in
ancient societies.The authors
themselves were quite surprised by the findings (Discovery, 1997) but stood y
their results despite being the major focus of riticism in the following
volume of Naturwissenschaften.Of the nine mummies evaluated, ll showed
signs of ocaine and hashish Tetrahydrocannabinol), whereas all but one
sampled ositive for nicotine.It is
interesting too that the concentrations of the compounds suggest uses other
han that of buse.(For example,
modern drug addicts ften have concentrations of cocaine and nicotine in heir
hair 75 and 20 times higher respectively than hat found in the mummy hair
samples.) It is even possible that the quantities found may be high due
toconcentration in body tissues through time.

Without question, the study has sparked an interest in various
disciplines.As Balabanova et. al.
predicted, "...the results open up an entirely new field of research
which unravels aspects of past human life-style far beyound [sic] basic
biological reconstruction."

The Criticisms

The biggest criticism of the findings
of Balabanova et. al. was not necessarily directed at the extraction process
per se, although this was discussed.The biggest criticism was that cocaine and nicotine could not possibly
have been used in Egypt before the discovery of the New World, and that
transatlantic journeys were not known - or at least they are highly
speculative.It is safe to say that
the criticisms of the study would have been minimal or nonexistent if the
findings had been made of Old World drugs.Such findings, in fact, would not have been at all unusual as the use
of stimulants were known in Egypt.Poppy seeds and lotus plants have been identified for just this use in
manuscripts (the Papyrus Ebers) and in hieroglyphs (as Balabanova et. al.
show).

Schafer (1993) argues that, "the
detection of pharmacologically active substances in mummified material never
proves their use prior to death." He argues that such compounds could
have been introduced as part of the mummification process.The suggestion is that (especially)
nicotine could have been

introduced
around the mummy (and subsequently absorbed into its tissue) as an
insecticide (being used as a preservative) within relatively modern times.A similar criticism was raised by Bjorn
(1993) who wondered if nicotine might have been absorbed by the mummies from
cigarette smoke in the museums where the mummies have been preserved.According to Schafer, the only way to show
that the compounds were taken into the bodies while they were alive would be
to find different concentrations at different distances from the scalp - a
procedure not undertaken by the authors.

Another interesting criticism of
Schafer (1993) is that Balabanova et. al. might have been the victims of
faked mummies.Apparently people
(living in the not too far distant past) believed that mummies contained
black tar called bitumen and that it could be ground up and used to cure
various illnesses.In fact the very
word 'mummy' comes from the Persian 'mummia' meaning bitumen (Discovery,
1997).A business seems to have
developed wherein recently dead bodies where deliberately aged to appear as
mummies and that some of the perpetrators of such deeds were drug abusers.

The criticism that seems most popular is that the identified
drugs might have been products of "necrochemical and necrobiochemical
processes" (Schafer, 1993; Bjorn, 1993).One explanation is that Egyptian priests used
tropine-alkaloid-containing plants during the mummification process that
subsequently underwent changes in the mummy to resemble the identified
compounds.

Yet another argument is that there is
nothing in the literature showing that any of the three compounds have been
identified in bodies that have been dead for some time.

Reply to the
Critics

Analytical Techniques and Contamination

“In the study, samples were taken
from nine mummies that were dated from between 1070 B.C. to 395 A.D.The samples included hair, skin and muscle
were taken from the head and abdomen.Bone tissue was also taken from the skull.All tissues were pulverized and dissolved in NaCl solution,
homogenized, and centrifuged.A
portion of the supernatant was extracted with chloroform and dried and then
dissolved in a phosphate buffer.Samples were then measured by both radioimmunoassay (Merck; Biermann)
and gas chromatography / mass spectrometry (Hewlett Packard) - hereinafter
GCMS. “

“This is the procedure used to
produce what McPhillips (1998) considered indisputable evidence for
confirming products of substance abuse in hair.Within recent years, hair analysis has been used more commonly
in this kind of screening process and the techniques employed have been
optimized.Mistakes are known to have
occurred in some cases evaluating for metals, but the ability to detect drugs
such as cocaine, nicotine, and hashish seem not been problematic (Wilhelm,
1996).The two possible mistakes in
analyzing hair for drugs

include
false positives, which are caused by environmental contamination; and false
negatives, where actual compounds are lost because of such things as hair
coloring or perming.In recent years,
these techniques of hair analysis have revealed the interesting findings of
arsenic in the hair of Napoleon Bonaparte, and laudanum in the hair of the
poet Keats. “

“The procedure includes a thorough
washing of the hair to remove external contaminants followed by a process of
physical degradation using a variety of methods (such as digestion with
enzymes or dissolution with acids, organic solvents, etc.,).Following these preparatory procedures,
the hair is then analyzed.Antibody
testing (e.g. radioimmunoassay) is a well-established procedure although
there is small potential of obtaining false positive results.These are mainly caused by the
cross-reactivity of the antibody with other compounds, including minor
analgesics, cold remedies and antipsychotic drugs - compounds not likely to
be found in Egyptian mummies.Because
of the possible false positives, chromatography (GC-MS) is routinely utilized
to confirm the results.“

“The suggestion of nicotine
contamination from cigarette smoke is eliminated by the use of solvents
and/or acids in the cleaning process - methods used by Balabanova et. al. and
all other researchers that have documented drugs in mummies. “

“The validity of Balabanova's
findings seems to be vindicated at least so far as the analytical methods
used in the study.The authors'
methods as well as those in the additional findings reported here (see below)
have used the combination of immunological and chromatographic methods to
both analyze and confirmsamples. “

Faked Mummies

“The argument that the mummies might
have been modern fakes was investigated by David (Discovery, 1997).David is the Keeper of Egyptology at the
Manchester Museum, and undertook her own analysis of mummies, independent of
Balabanova's group.In addition, she
traveled to Munich to evaluate for herself the mummies studied by
Balabanova's group.Unfortunately
the mummies weren't available for filming and they were being kept isolated
from further research on grounds of religious respect.David had to resort to the museum's
records.She found that, except for
the city's famous mummy of Henot Tawi (Lady of the Two Lands) the mummies
were of unknown origin and some were represented only by detached heads. “

“David's inability to examine the
mummies herself may have kept the possibility of faked ones open; however,
her evaluation of the museum's records seemed to indicate otherwise.The mummies were preserved with packages
of their viscera inside.Some even
contained images of the gods.In
addition the state of mummification itself was very good.The isolated heads may have been fakes
(evidence one way or the other is lacking) but the intact bodies examined in
Balabanova's research were clearly genuine. “

Chemical Changes

“The argument that the identified
drugs might be byproducts of decomposition is highly unlikely.The argument appears to resemble a 'Just
So' story of biochemical evolution without the benefit of natural
selection.Schafer (1993) admits
that natural decomposition or mummification has never led to the synthesis of
cocaine or related alkaloids but leaves the possibility open anyway.He argues that the compounds in question
might theoretically have been produced by tropine-alkaloid-containing plants
(such as were present in species that were utilized in the mummification
process). “

“The benefit of the doubt in this
case clearly goes to Balabanova et. al. Until it is shown how cocaine could
be produced in this way, the argument is hypothetical at best. “

Isolated Example

“The detection of drugs in human hair
is a fairly recent endeavor (McPhillips, 1998; Sachs, 1998).A few compounds were identified during
the 1980's but it wasn't until the 1990s that drug screening via hair
analysis became accepted and used as a possible alternative to urine
sampling.The criticism that no
known cases of cocaine, nicotine, or hashish have been reported in human hair
must, therefor be interpreted with clarification.None of these compounds had been observed in human hair
because the process had not been fully developed, nor had the application
even been considered until quite recently.Even then the claim is not true. “

“Cartwell et. al. (1991) using a
radioimmunoassay method detected cocaine metabolites in pre-Columbian mummy
hair from South America.In this
study two out of eight mummies analyzed showed cocaine metabolites.All samples tested were confirmed by a
separate laboratory (Psychomedics Corporation, Santa Monica, California)
using GC-MS.The two mummies testing
positive were from the Camarones Valley in northern Chile.The artifacts as well as the mummies at
this site were typical of Inca culture. “

“Since the initial work of Balabanova
et. al., other studies have revealed the same drugs (cocaine, nicotine, and
hashish) in Egyptian mummies, confirming the original results.Nerlich et. al. (1995), in a study evaluating the
tissue pathology of an Egyptian mummy dating from approximately 950 B.C.,
found the compounds in several of the mummy's organs.They found the highest amounts of
nicotine and cocaine in the mummy's stomach, and the hashish traces primarily
in the lungs.These findings were
again identified using both radioimmunoassay and GSMS techniques.Very similar results were again found in
yet another study by Parsche and Nerlich (1995).Again, the findings were obtained using the immunological and
chromatographic techniques. “

“David's work (Discovery, 1997)
though not finding cocaine, did confirm the presence of nicotine.This finding has seemed a little less
threatening to conservative scholarship in that it seems possible (albeit
unlikely) that a nicotine-producing plant may have existed in Africa within
historic times - only becoming extinct recently. “

“Such a possibility might allow for a
comfortable resolution to conservative scholarship but doesn't explain the
evidence of cocaine.Additionally,
the possibility of a native plant going extinct is unlikely.Much more reasonable would be that an
introduced species under cultivation could go extinct, yet this only begs the
question of the original provenance of the species. “

“In any event, considering the
several confirmations of Balabanova's work (as well as that of Caldwell et.
al. prior to her study) it appears that the argument against their findings
based on too little evidence is quickly vanishing (if not already obviated).
“

Pre-Columbian Voyages to America

“The major reason for the initial
criticisms to Balabanova's work is the disbelief in pre-Columbian
transoceanic contacts.Egyptologist
John Baines (Discovery, 1997) went so far as to state, "The ideathat the Egyptians should have traveled to
America is overall absurd...and I also don't know anyone who spends time
doing research in these areas, because they're not perceived to be areas that
have any real meaning for the subjects." Another interpretation on why researchers haven't considered
the subject closer is given by Kehoe (1998), "Aftermid-century, any
archaeologist worried about money or career avoided looking at pre-Columbian
contacts across saltwater [p. 193].." It appears that acknowledging that
pre-Columbian contacts occurred was not academically acceptable.Kehoe (1998) also gives examples of
several researchers whose work has been academically marginalized because it
supported these views (e.g. Stephen Jett, Carl Johannessen, Gordon Ekholm,
Paul Tolstoy, and George Carter). “

“Surprising at it may seem, evidence
for early ocean voyages to America from the Old World is not lacking - nor is
it negligibly verifiable.Within the
last two years, two periodicals, focusing on these contacts have been
established.The first, entitled
Pre-Columbiana, is edited by Stephen C. Jett, Professor of Clothings and
Textiles at the University of California, Davis; the second is entitled
Migration and Diffusion and is edited by Professor Christine Pellek in
Vienna, Italy.There is certainly
quite a bit of spurious reports of early contacts from the Old World,
however, a general disregard for all of the evidence is, anymore, itself
evidence of academic negligence, as these two periodicals indicate. “

“A bibliography of these early
contacts is given by John Sorensen (1998) in the first issue of
Pre-Columbiana.It is a good example
of the kinds of evidence being uncovered by legitimate researchers and
institutions.The bibliography is
itself a condensation of a two-volume work of these publications and includes
titles such as: The world's oldest ship? (showing evidence for a pre-Columbian
ship in America) published in Archaeology; Peruvian fabrics (showing very
strong similarities between Peru and Asia) published in Anthropological
papers of the American Museum of Natural History; Robbing native American
cultures: Van Sertima's Afro centricity and the Olmecs (showing evidence for
connections between Africa and the Olmecs of Middle America) published in
Current Anthropology; Possible Indonesian or Southeast Asian Influences in
New World textile industries (showing at least three textile-related
inventions that appear in both Indonesia and the New World) published in
Indonesian Textiles; and, Genes may link Ancient Eurasians, Native Americans,
published in Science.”

“And the list goes on and on - some
evidence being better than others - but as a whole it seems pretty much
irrefutable. Claims to the contrary seem to be made by individuals with a
vested interest in the isolationist position. The evidence, pro and con, when
evaluated objectively, would seem without question, to favor the diffusionist
position (which claims that pre-Columbian contacts took place). “

Considerations

“The initial reaction to the findings
of Balabanova et. al. were highly critical.These criticisms were not based on a known failing in the authors'
research methodology, rather they were attempts to cast doubt on an
implication of the research - that cocaine and nicotine were brought to Egypt
from the New World before Columbus.This conclusion is not acceptable to conservative investigators of the
past.In fact it suggests a
deep-rooted aversion to what Balabanova suggested might mean an unraveling of
aspects of history contrary to basic reconstructions.This aversion, according to Kehoe (1998)
stems from the conviction that Indians were primitive savages destined to be
overcome by the civilized world - that the acme of evolutionary success
resided in the conquering race itself.‘Childlike savages could never have voyaged across oceans.’ “

“Balabanova's findings bring yet
other evidence forward that humanity is not so easily pinioned into the
pre-conceived notions of primitive and advanced - even as this might be
related to the presumed technology of earlier times.The quest for discovery - to find new
worlds - is not just a modern selective advantage of our species.Perhaps it is the defining
characteristic. “